Just for fun - great Sox postseason relief performances

[mvp 78]

Yes, clearly the fact that other top closers are cost controlled due to lack of MLB experience and Papelbon is not has any bearing at all on this discussion

 

Yes, it means you should be able to find younger and cheaper options than a declining Paplebum.

[iortiz]

I think we are agreeing that Papelbon is still a good closer. I agree that he is still effective in that role. I said that Koji was more efficient, meaning that he got the job done quickly. Koji doesn't mess around. What I remember with Papelbon is that there would often be some 9th inning drama before he would eventually get the save.

 

The only issue I have with Paps is his contract. No closer is worth $15 mil a year.

 

Oh, so your perception is that Koji get the job done quicklier than Pap, and that's why Koji is more efficient? Well, I haven't followed all the saves that both have posted and probably you are right, but IMO Kim, this is irrelevant as long they get the job done; SV% and stay durable (IPs) (as long Pap is still effective). Since both pitchers are different, the way they get the SVs are different, by definition. Also, I think Pap is making 12 M/Y or something which is not a big deal considering what the Red Sox and other teams have paid for busts, sorry closers, in recent years.

Edited March 19, 2016 by iortiz

[iortiz]

To be precise, Paps last contract had an AAV of 12.6 million including the vested option year.

 

I think that's his AVV contract. Not sure how the 15 M came out.

[iortiz]

BL, in the last 2 years Pap has been effective, consistent and durable. The numbers are there. Pap is making what he is making because he proved to post what he is actually posting at the time (when he left Boston). Unfortunately, others have not that privilege (since haven't proved s***) and others are starting to make a case to get what he is making in a Y basis.

 

Hopefully Kimbrel follows Pap's steps in terms of SV% & durability (IPs), just as Pap is following Mo's.

[Dojji]

Yes, it means you should be able to find younger and cheaper options than a declining Paplebum.

 

I have never denied this. there is a difference between possibly finding ways to cheap out successfully at closer, and saying a player who's one of the most consistently effective at his position, a very dependable closer who has always been able to take the innings and make the saves over a 11 year career and shows no real signs of slowing down, is overpaid when he makes half what the best starting position players and/or starting pitchers make.

 

Make no mistake, a player of similar prominence in any starting position on the field would make more than 12-15M. I wouldn't say he's overpaid or underpaid. I would say he's paid like something that's actually a very rare object in professional baseball -- a durable professional closer that's been able to stay in the field as a closer without major injury,loss of command, or just plain getting figured out by hitters, for over a decade.

 

Closers don't tend to get paid because closers don't tend to be as durable as Pap has been. Closers that are that durable, get paid. Prove me wrong.

Edited March 19, 2016 by Dojji

[User Name]

Paying for past performance is stupid, and Papelbon is at the twilight of his career. He was overpaid when he signed the contract, and he was exiting his prime years, and he's overpaid now because he's entering sudden decline territory and making ace closer money when he's a mid-tier guy. He was lights-out at the beginning of his career, borderline elite when he lost his splitter, and just very good- more than decent the last couple of years. I just don't get the adoration for Papelbon. He's been durable (that has value, ask Joaquin Benoit), but that's not worth top of the market money. This discussion is stupid. In synthesis: He's still good, but he's overpaid and I'd take both Kimbrel and Carson Smith over him in a flash, and if you don't, you need a reality check.

[Dojji]

But you're not paying for past performance. At least not on papelbon's current contract. The contract is nearly over yet he's still performing at a high level.

 

papelbon is appropriately paid as a high level performer in his field. he is not "overpaid" unless any amount of money appropriate to a 11 year MLB veteran who can still pitch at an all star level is an overpay.

 

We should have learned by now that there is a risk to cheaping out at the closer's position. We thought we'd be just fine plugging in another less expensive closer and the result was an absolute gongshow in 2012. We got lucky that Koji's been durable enough (it was a serious question at the time) to pitch at a very high level over the last few years.

 

And if you think Koji doesn't have some HUGE questionmarks Papelbon doesn't have to deal with going into this coming season, then you missed the fact that Koji missed a large chunk of last season and is going to be 41 this year. There's a reason we sprung for Kimbrel in the offseason. The fact is we got hella lucky that Koji didn't implode by now, we took a pretty significant risk expanding his role at his age.

Edited March 19, 2016 by Dojji

[Kimmi]

15 mil a year is half what the top starting position players and SP's are making. Many closers are worth half the going rate for position and and rotation all stars. When top stars made $20M, you paid top closers $8-12M. Now top stars go for 30M, the same ratio applies.

 

Salary inflation is a thing, Revenues are up across the board and that will have an impact in what you pay your talent when contract time comes along. Holding to an old paradigm without taking the time to rationally consider whether it may be oudated, will just set you up for sticker shock.

 

Well IMO, the top stars making $30 million a year are overpaid also. Regardless, relief pitchers, including closers, are the easiest players to replace. The dropoff between the best closer in the league and an average closer is not large enough to warrant the salary difference.

 

I love Papelbon, and have said many times that I would take him back if not for the large salary. So this is in no way a knock against him. But he is overpaid.

[Kimmi]

Oh, so your perception is that Koji get the job done quicklier than Pap, and that's why Koji is more efficient? Well, I haven't followed all the saves that both have posted and probably you are right, but IMO Kim, this is irrelevant as long they get the job done; SV% and stay durable (IPs) (as long Pap is still effective). Since both pitchers are different, the way they get the SVs are different, by definition. Also, I think Pap is making 12 M/Y or something which is not a big deal considering what the Red Sox and other teams have paid for busts, sorry closers, in recent years.

 

I agree that the bottom line is securing the save, and how the closer goes about doing that really isn't relevant. As I said, Paps is still an effective closer.

 

Except that as a fan watching the games, I really want my closer to come into the game and set the opposing team down in order. It's extremely nerve-wracking to watch a closer give up a couple of hits or walks before getting the job done.

 

Either way, I completely agree with UN that Papelbon is overpaid.

[User Name]

Well IMO, the top stars making $30 million a year are overpaid also. Regardless, relief pitchers, including closers, are the easiest players to replace. The dropoff between the best closer in the league and an average closer is not large enough to warrant the salary difference.

 

I love Papelbon, and have said many times that I would take him back if not for the large salary. So this is in no way a knock against him. But he is overpaid.

 

Also, consider the fact that you can't compare a starter to a closer, because they are different positions with different pay scales. It's a stupid, arbitrary comparison. You compare relief pitchers to other relief pitcher. The fact is the average closer made a third of what Papelbon made last year and in terms of WAR, Papelbon was pretty much a slightly above average relief pitcher. If you're making top of the market money while being slightly above average you are overpaid.

 

Dojji and many others here love talking out of both sides of their mouth. You can't say on one hand that Sandoval is overpaid, then turn back and say Papelbon isn't. Overpaid is overpaid, depending on what their peers (as in, other closers for Papelbon and other 3B for Panda) are making. Be consistent people.

[Spudboy]

Well IMO, the top stars making $30 million a year are overpaid also. Regardless, relief pitchers, including closers, are the easiest players to replace. The dropoff between the best closer in the league and an average closer is not large enough to warrant the salary difference.

 

I love Papelbon, and have said many times that I would take him back if not for the large salary. So this is in no way a knock against him. But he is overpaid.

 

And this, in my opinion, sums it all up.

[Kimmi]

Also, consider the fact that you can't compare a starter to a closer, because they are different positions with different pay scales. It's a stupid, arbitrary comparison. You compare relief pitchers to other relief pitcher. The fact is the average closer made a third of what Papelbon made last year and in terms of WAR, Papelbon was pretty much a slightly above average relief pitcher. If you're making top of the market money while being slightly above average you are overpaid.

 

Dojji and many others here love talking out of both sides of their mouth. You can't say on one hand that Sandoval is overpaid, then turn back and say Papelbon isn't. Overpaid is overpaid, depending on what their peers (as in, other closers for Papelbon and other 3B for Panda) are making. Be consistent people.

 

Agreed. Comparing a relief pitcher, including a closer, to a starting pitcher or position player doesn't work. Replacement level for relief pitchers is much lower. When you consider that when a closer becomes injured, a team usually fills that position with the set up guy, and the new relief pitcher being added to the team is often replacing a "lesser" reliever, that drops replacement level even lower.

[Dojji]

Yes, that's why the best relief pitchers make half or less what the best starters or position players make. True they are less vaulable than a position player or an SP. That argument however is not indefinitely valid. There is a point at which the market will bear a reasonable price for closing talent.

 

How many times have we failed to "easily" replace our closer just in the last 20 years? Papelbon is still the most successful closer we've had in years, perhaps the most successful closer we've ever had if you count only contributions made in a Red Sox uniform.

 

here's the bottom line: If it was that easy to find a great closer who could play solid high level baseball in the closer's position for more than 4 years at a time, we would have found more than 1 of them in the last 30 years. There IS a value to stability in the closer's role, we have ignored it to our peril in the past, we will ignore it to our peril in the future.

Edited March 20, 2016 by Dojji

[mvp 78]

The Sox have had many good closers in the past 30 years. Why do you need one that sticks around 5 years?

[Dojji]

Why wouldn't you? Do you want to have to keep taking the same risks over and over year after year just waiting for the next one to screw you over? We've had to do that dance in the past, and been screwed over by it plenty of times.

[mvp 78]

Why overspend at the closer position when you can get a guy for half the price to repeat the same performance?

[Bellhorn04]

Well, it looks like the Sox really wanted to lock down that position for 2-3 years, because they paid a steep price for Kimbrel.

[User Name]

Kimbrel is smack in the middle of his prime. If you're going to pay a steep price, pay it for peak years and performance. Kimbrel provides both, Papelbon provides neither.

[Dojji]

Well it really depends on how well Papelbon ages as a reliever. His successful transition away from the fastball is actually an extremely good sign for that. being able to transition from a power pitcher into more of a command and guile pitcher shows the kind of intelligence it takes to pitch well deep into his 30's.

 

That being the case, if he can manage to keep adding tricks as he loses velo, he may be able to remain fully effective through the life of another 4-5 year contract and I could see a team in need of help on the back end taking that gamble with him -- he's been a decent investment for the money so far due to his durability and dependability. Papelbon provides stability in an area where stability may be more important than overall quality of performance. That can be worth paying for, if you're satisfied with your offense and defense and feel like you're a closer away fron contending.

Edited March 20, 2016 by Dojji

[Kimmi]

Well, it looks like the Sox really wanted to lock down that position for 2-3 years, because they paid a steep price for Kimbrel.

 

Steep price indeed.

 

Compare Kimbrel with Carson Smith, as one example:

 

Kimbrel in 2015 was worth 1.5 WAR at a salary of $9 mil. His salary increases to $11 mil this year.

 

Smith in 2015 was worth 2.1 WAR at a salary of $510 K. His salary increases to $529 K this year.

 

Dojii is correct in the sense that Kimbrel was worth his salary in terms of WAR. (Papelbon was not.) The point is, however, that relievers are not worth spending that much money on when a comparable replacement can usually be found at a much cheaper price.

 

I understand the difference in salaries between players under team control and free agents, but the fact of the matter is that the best relievers are so often guys who are brought up from the farm, while free agent relievers who receive big contracts usually end up being a mistake.

 

There are far better ways to spend a team's money than on relief pitching. And that is no way implying that bullpens are not important.

[Dojji]

Well it is implying that bullpens are not important, but that's OK because they aren't as important as the lineup or the rotation. That doesn't mean there's never a time to break out the checkbook and sign a reliever. Even in the bullpen, you frequently wind up getting what you pay for. The price of cheaping out on the pen is increased risk. If you can manage that fine, and it's definitely possible to get as lucky as we did with Koji Uehara, but it's also as possible to get as "lucky" as we did with Dan Bard, Andrew Bailey or Eric Gagne.

[Kimmi]

Well it is implying that bullpens are not important, but that's OK because they aren't as important as the lineup or the rotation. That doesn't mean there's never a time to break out the checkbook and sign a reliever. Even in the bullpen, you frequently wind up getting what you pay for. The price of cheaping out on the pen is increased risk. If you can manage that fine, and it's definitely possible to get as lucky as we did with Koji Uehara, but it's also as possible to get as "lucky" as we did with Dan Bard, Andrew Bailey or Eric Gagne.

 

No, I am not implying that bullpens are not important. I just think that you can build a very good one without handing out a large contract to a relief pitcher.

 

FTR, Bard was a very good set up man before he completely fell apart.

 

I agree that there are times that you have to sign a reliever. You are not going to be able to completely build a pen from within. I just don't see a Papelbon-like contract being reasonable. There are less expensive, proven closers that will give you almost the same level of production for less money.

[Dojji]

but if you go for a less expensive closer you're taking a risk on a guy with less of a track record, the kind of pitchers who get paid as closers are the ones that stand the test of time. And those are not very common.

[a700hitter]

but if you go for a less expensive closer you're taking a risk on a guy with less of a track record, the kind of pitchers who get paid as closers are the ones that stand the test of time. And those are not very common.

No they are not very common. I have lived through way too many bad closers to realize that. Getting a high priced proven closer is one of the luxuries of being a big market team with a large payroll. We have no need to play the closer lottery.

[iortiz]

I agree that the bottom line is securing the save, and how the closer goes about doing that really isn't relevant. As I said, Paps is still an effective closer.

 

Except that as a fan watching the games, I really want my closer to come into the game and set the opposing team down in order. It's extremely nerve-wracking to watch a closer give up a couple of hits or walks before getting the job done.

 

Either way, I completely agree with UN that Papelbon is overpaid.

Yeah we agree on that, Pap is still an effective, consistent and a durable closer after 11 Y (until his performances show the opposite), thing that is really really hard to find in baseball mostly in relievers, reason why I think he is special, just like Mo. Again, this is the reason he got that contract at the time -- because he was a proven closer, and most important, a closer who still had plenty of gas at the time/still in his prime. Time has given him reason. Numbers are there. Unfortunately the Phillys have been a mess.

 

Pap and few others like him are the gems that a WS contender needs. Imagine Pap in Detroit in those years, I would have bet that they could have won a couple of rings with Pap in their Pen, I have no doubts.

 

Let's see if Chapman, Kimbrel and others can be as consistent and durable as Pap after 11 Y. As I said, Kimbrel seems to be in that direction; following Pap's steps.

Edited March 20, 2016 by iortiz

[User Name]

No they are not very common. I have lived through way too many bad closers to realize that. Getting a high priced proven closer is one of the luxuries of being a big market team with a large payroll. We have no need to play the closer lottery.

 

That's why they got Kimbrel, who is highly priced, but a proven performer in the middle of his prime. If you're going to pay, pay for prime-year production.

[iortiz]

Just as Pap at the time.

[Kimmi]

but if you go for a less expensive closer you're taking a risk on a guy with less of a track record, the kind of pitchers who get paid as closers are the ones that stand the test of time. And those are not very common.

 

Not necessarily. But even if you do get a "good" closer instead of a "great" closer, the drop off is not that large. Not enough to warrant the difference in salary.

 

And part of the reason for not giving a closer a Papelbon-like contract is because so very few of them remain consistent over the length of a long contract. Big contracts for closers by and large end up going bad. Not worth the risk, IMO.

[Kimmi]

Yeah we agree on that, Pap is still an effective, consistent and a durable closer after 11 Y (until his performances show the opposite), thing that is really really hard to find in baseball mostly in relievers, reason why I think he is special, just like Mo. Again, this is the reason he got that contract at the time -- because he was a proven closer, and most important, a closer who still had plenty of gas at the time/still in his prime. Time has given him reason. Numbers are there. Unfortunately the Phillys have been a mess.

 

Pap and few others like him are the gems that a WS contender needs. Imagine Pap in Detroit in those years, I would have bet that they could have won a couple of rings with Pap in their Pen, I have no doubts.

 

Let's see if Chapman, Kimbrel and others can be as consistent and durable as Pap after 11 Y. As I said, Kimbrel seems to be in that direction; following Pap's steps.

 

I like what I've seen from Kimbrel so far. He's like Koji. He doesn't mess around.

 

We still paid too much for him though.

[Dojji]

No, we overpaid for Sandoval and Porcello. We *paid* for Kimbrel, just like Philidelphia paid for Papelbon. Not every high cost transaction is an overpay, nor is every situation in which we didn't buy low "overpay." "Costly" and "overpay" are not synonyms, some things are worth a high price.

 

We were willing to fork out what it cost for Kimbrel because he is a premium value commodity and the price was up due to the way the last World Series fell out. Sometimes a big market team needs to be willing to pay value for value, and that's alright.

 

by any sandard in which Kimbrel was an overpay, every baseball player in the league is overpaid.